Any Questions for Senator Kerry?

He is being interviewed by the USA Today editorial board Tuesday and they are giving the public a chance to ask a couple of questions too. Of course, you supply the question and they get to ask it, but still I think it might be nice to have him answer a question or two that has been on our minds.
If you are interested the link is below, but there isn't much time left to post. Registration is easy if you aren't already registered.


http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/11/thankful-americans--9.html?csp=34

I wouldn't have seen this!

and I am wondering if there is any chance at all that the too-quickly closed BCCI books will be re-opened and its many serious and outstanding questions answered?

...my question:

Senator Kerry,

Could you talk about the significance to our country of Copenhagen? Do you think it is important for President Obama to attend?

Thank you, Senator. :)

It would be interesting to hear his answer. While I do think that Karzai agreeing to a runoff was better than it would have been had he refused to budge, especially as some in the administration had the week before Kerry was there said that they considered Karzai the winner and they likely would not have turned from that if he refused, Karzai seems to have, if anything, dug in his heels refusing to change since then. Kerry's entire plan explicitly works only when there is a credible partner per his own words. Is there any government, national, provincial, or local that meets that criterion?

I really liked this last question and answer:


I liked his Afghanistan and Pakistan answers, but the 4 or 5 years estimate will cause explosions here and elsewhere in teh blogoshpere, where that is all they will see and will miss that Kerry has been one of the strongest, most persuasive voices pushing back what McChrystal planned. (My own ignorance was shown when I was stunned that he said that Pakistan bordered on Iran - until I pulled up a map - and of course, it does.)

Overall, I was struck by the serious, above politics tone that Kerry strikes here repeatedly. The idealism and values of 2004 are still there, as is his concern that the soldiers are operating under a policy that the leaders really have a gut feel is the best they can find, but there is no hesitation to give the type of complicated answers that are more insightful, but less likely to be politically powerful soundbites - such as many things he said in 2008 as a surrogate for Obama. In someways, it reminds me of watching the confirmation hearing of Dr Rice and realizing that the brilliant Kerry of 2004, was in reality even smarter and more serious than when running for President. The voice here is more like the relaxed, serious Kerry as he is chairing the SFRC.

An e-mail message I received 2 days ago:



I just read it right now. D'oh!!!!

It was a great question.

But it's a lesson for all of us and you know there will be future situations! It really was (is!) a great question.